Process Metrics Document

TRACTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
HEMM Maintenance
& Repair Processes
METRICS (KPI’S) TO ASSESS

PROCESS PERFORMANCE
Introduction
The primary goal and responsibility of the Maintenance Department is to

maintain equipment in optimum condition via problem / failure
avoidance. One of the key tools of the Maintenance Department is
performance measurement. In order to be effective, performance
measurements should give us not only an accurate picture of how we are
performing relative to established targets and/or global benchmarks but
also provide us with a prediction or projection as to what we can expect
in terms of future performance.
In spite of the fact that it is human nature to want to report good news,
the most valuable performance measures assist us in the identification of
weak areas, poor practices and other opportunities for improvement.
Therefore, it behooves us to take a critical look at our performance via an
honest assessment of that performance. Only in this way are we able to
correct small issues before they become major problems. The collection
of performance measures included in this document help us to identify
and understand on-site performance issues related to project health and
maintenance / repair process performance in support of that project. In
doing so we are also able to gain some insight into related issues such as
application severity, operating practices, contract guarantees /
commitments, and contract financial health.
“Performance Metric” is a term used to describe the outcome of any

process used to collect, analyze, interpret and present quantitative data.
It is a measurement parameter that enables performance against some
pre-defined Target or Benchmark to be monitored … a measurement
used to gauge performance of a function, operation or business relative
to past results and projected future behavior.
“Benchmark” is another term frequently used to describe performance.

Benchmark is defined as a world-class performance standard relative to a
specific performance metric. A Benchmark represents and quantifies
"world-class performance or best practice" of an operation or of specific
functions within that operation according to a specified performance
metric. A benchmark is determined by and represents actual,
documented, sustainable performance over time relative to some
performance metric. Caterpillar models have been referred to for global
benchmarking.
A great deal of time, energy and resources have been invested identifying
and developing several metrics of performance that quantify and trend
product and project health. Based on that experience we have been
able to document actual site performance in many of those areas and
feel very confident representing some of those results as Benchmarks.
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of that effort has been

concentrated on fleets of large Off Highway Trucks. Therefore, most of the
Benchmarks used in this document are specific to those fleets. When we
have felt comfortable in doing so, we have also cited our best estimates
of what those Benchmarks might be for other mining equipment if we had
access to a significant sample of data for those machines. In situations
where we do not have that same level of confidence, we have made
that clear as we do not care to mislead the user by speculating.
The metrics contained herein will provide insight into the performance of
the individual Maintenance & Repair Processes and their contributions to
the end results. Those metrics are organized as follows:
1. - Fleet Performance Metrics
2. - Maintenance & Repair Processes Metrics
2.1 - Preventive Maintenance
2.2 - Condition Monitoring
2.3 - Backlog Management
2.4 - Planning and Scheduling
2.5 - Parts Management
2.6 - Repair Management
2.7 - Component Management
2.8 - Human Resources - Training
2.9 - Continuous Improvement

1.1 Fleet Performance Metrics

The following measures are “Top Tier” performance metrics or Key
Performance Indicators (KPI’s) that enable management to quantify,
assess and monitor product health and site performance.
1.1.1 - Mean Time Between Shutdowns (MTBS)

Definition:
The average operating time between machine stoppages … a function
of the average frequency of equipment downtime events, expressed in
hours.
Calculation Methodology:
Operating Hours
MTBS = (hours)
Number of Shutdowns
Description:
MTBS is a measure that combines the effects of inherent machine
reliability and the effectiveness of the equipment management
organization in its ability to influence results through problem avoidance.
Data Source(s):
Operating hours obtained from machine service meter reading. Note,
hours obtained from dispatch systems frequently do not agree with
machine SMU due to coding of production delays, etc. Note that hours
taken from machine SMU will be higher than those taken from dispatch,
oftentimes by as much as 10 percent.
Note: Production delay hours may not be tracked and accounted for
separately and are therefore included in the total operating hours. Sites
that use dispatch systems may track and code production delay hours
separate from operating hours hence they must be acquired from
dispatch.
Shutdown count obtained from machine workorder history and dispatch

system. Dispatch information must be used to account for shutdown
events that are not accompanied by a workorder.
Benchmarks & Targets:
MTBS benchmarks vary significantly by machine model, their relative size,

age and design “maturity” and complexity. MTBS for large Off Highway
Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class is very well documented. The benchmark
for a fleet of new trucks is 80 hours; that of a “mature” fleet (one that has
undergone its first round of major component rebuilds) is 60 hours.
Since by definition these benchmarks represent documented, best-in-
class performance sustainable over time, we are frequently asked to
assess performance through a range of results. The following table
represents our best judgment in this area.
MTBS Assessment / Characteristics

50 to 60 Excellent; high % of scheduled downtime; Equipment Mgmt. organization is highly
hours proactive.
40 to 50
Acceptable; majority of downtime is scheduled; substantial emphasis on Equipment Mgmt.
hours
30 to 40 Marginal; approx. half of all downtime is scheduled; Equipment Mgmt. disciplines not fully
hours functional.
20 to 30
Fair; < 40% downtime is scheduled; minimal effort on Equipment Mgmt.
hours
< 20 hours Poor; only PM’s are scheduled; Equipment Mgmt. organization is purely reactive.
Table 1: Site performance through range of MTBS
Benchmarks for trucks smaller than the 785 and the 797 are less well
known although it is believed that MTBS for trucks in the 769 – 777 size class
will be significantly higher (as much 30 to 40%) while that of the 797 will be
perhaps 10% lower.
Similarly, benchmarks for other large mining equipment are not well
documented. However, indications are that once MTBS data is collected,
analyzed and validated, the results will fall into the following ranges:
Machine / Model MTBS

D10 / D11 TTT’s 55 to 75 hours
992 / 994 WL’s 55 to 75 hours
16 MG 95 to 105 hours
24 MG 55 to 75 hours
5000 HEX 55 to 75 hours
Table 2: MTBS guidelines for mining machines

1.1.2 - Mean Time To Repair (MTTR)

Definition:
The average downtime for machine stoppages … the average duration
of equipment downtime events, expressed in hours.
Total Downtime Hours

MTTR = (hours)
Number of Shutdowns
Description:
Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) is a performance measure that quantifies
repair turnaround time, i.e. how quickly (or slowly) a machine is returned
to service once a downtime incident occurs. MTTR combines the effects
of inherent machine maintainability / serviceability and the efficiency of
the equipment management organization in delivering rapid remedial
action in the execution of needed repairs.
Data Source(s):
Downtime hours obtained from machine workorder history and dispatch
system. Dispatch information must be used to account for downtime that
is not accompanied by a workorder. It is essential to note that repair
delay time should be included in the downtime history calculation. If
delay times are known, MTTR should be calculated both with and without
delays.
Shutdown count obtained from machine workorder history and dispatch system. Once
again, dispatch information must be used to account for shutdown events that
are not accompanied by a workorder.
MTTR benchmarks vary somewhat by machine model, their relative size

and design complexity but to a much lesser extent than MTBS; machine
age is the primary driver of MTTR. MTTR for large Off Highway Trucks in the
785 – 793 size class is very well documented. The benchmark for a fleet of
trucks in the 785 – 793 size class is 3 to 6 hours. MTTR for new trucks should
be close to the low end of the range while that of a “mature” fleet (one
that has undergone its first round of major component rebuilds) should be
closer to the high end of the range. This is a result of the relative
complexity of the repairs seen on new versus “mature” machines.
known although it is believed that MTTR for trucks in the 769 – 777 size class
will be slightly lower (10 to 20%) while that of the 797 will be perhaps 10%
higher.
documented. However, indications are that once MTTR data is collected,
analyzed and validated, the results will fall into much the same range as
large OHT fleets with larger machines, e.g. 24H MG and 5000 series HEX,
being as much as 30 to 40% higher.
1.1.3 - Percentage Scheduled Downtime

Definition:
The percentage of total downtime hours performed in a given period that
have been planned and scheduled.
Scheduled Downtime Hours

% Scheduled Downtime = X 100 (%)
Description:
A high percentage of unscheduled downtime incidents results in very
inefficient use of resources and excessive costs since personnel are
frequently shuffled from job to job and facilities and manpower
requirements need to be sufficiently large to accommodate huge swings
in the number of machines down for repairs. Data collected from mine
studies has shown that the average downtime for unplanned /
unscheduled work is up to eight times greater than the downtime for
planned / scheduled activity.
Data Source(s):
delay time should be included in the downtime history calculation.
Individual workorders should be coded as “scheduled” or “unscheduled in
order to track the number of downtime hours that are scheduled.

% Scheduled Downtime Hours for large Off Highway Trucks in the 785 – 793
size class is very well documented. Mines with highly effective equipment
management processes in place are able to execute 80% of its
maintenance and repair downtime activity on a scheduled basis. We
believe that this criterion holds true for other mining equipment as well
however requirements for less utilized, non-production equipment may be
somewhat less.
1.1.4 - Contractual Availability

Definition:
The ratio of time that a machine is capable of functioning in the intended
operation (available hours) to total hours in the period under
consideration (typically either based on calendar or scheduled hours),
expressed as a percentage. The calculation of available hours is not a
pure calculation since the result is amended by downtime hours that are
specifically excluded or limited by the terms of the contract.
Contractual Total Hours * - MARC Downtime Hours

(%)
Availability =
X 100
Total Hours *
*NOTE: “Total Hours” are typically either based on calendar or scheduled

hours depending upon the calculation methodology defined in the
agreement or customer expectations.
Description:
Contracts are written largely to ensure that production equipment is
available for operation a sufficient number of hours to enable the mine to
meet its production goals at a reasonable, predetermined operating cost.
The specific provisions of a contractual availability guarantee vary
significantly from site to site, i.e. time that the contractor will be given
credit for (available hours), time that the contractor will be held
accountable for (contractual downtime), as well as specific exclusions,
e.g. tires, dump bodies, welding, etc. are defined in detail in the contract.
Furthermore, contracts frequently specify caps or limits on downtime that
apply to things such as delays waiting on facilities, repair equipment and
or other support infrastructure that the contractor is not expected to
provide and has little control over. Because these exclusions and
limitations vary so widely from one site to the next, it is not possible to link
performance in this area to any kind of Benchmark nor does it make any
sense to attempt to make comparisons from one site to the next. Target
performance should be compliance with the provisions defined within the
contract or, in the absence of a contract, with customer expectations.
Data Source(s):
Total calendar hours is equal to the total time in the period to be
analyzed, e.g. 8760 hours / year, 720 hours / 30 day month, 168 hours /
week, etc.
If the available hours calculation involves the combination of operating
hours, stand-by hours, production delay hours and operational delay
hours (as it does in many instances), that information can be obtained
from the machine service meter reading and information coded within
the dispatch system.
MARC downtime hours are obtained from the machine workorder history
as well as the dispatch system. Dispatch information must be used to
account for downtime that is not accompanied by a workorder. It is
essential that the machine repair history contain detail sufficient to
determine if individual downtime events are excluded from the MARC
downtime calculation.
There is no Benchmark that is applicable to the Contractual Availability

performance metric. Target performance should be compliance with the
provisions defined within the contract or, in the absence of a contract,

with customer expectations.
1.1.5 - Availability Index

Definition:
The ratio of MTBS (average shutdown frequency) to the sum of MTBS and
MTTR (average shutdown duration), expressed as a percentage.
MTBS
Availability Index = X 100 (%)
MTBS + MTTR
Description:
Availability is the result of the frequency and duration of downtime events
(shutdowns). Because of the mathematical relationship between MTBS,
MTTR and Availability Index, the result shows which of the other two factors
had the greatest influence upon that result. This allows management to
react appropriately to changes in the Availability Index and by focusing
its effort and resources on the frequency (MTBS) or duration (MTTR) of
downtime events.
Data Source(s):
Since Availability Index is derived from MTBS and MTTR, the data sources
for those two metrics are applicable here as well.

Availability Index benchmarks vary significantly by machine model, their
relative size, age and design “maturity” and complexity. Availability Index
for large Off Highway Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class is very well
documented. The benchmark for a fleet of new trucks 92%; that of a
“mature” fleet (one that has undergone its first round of major component
rebuilds) is 88%.
Benchmarks for truck smaller than the 785 and the 797 are less well known
although it is believed that the Availability Index for trucks in the 769 – 777
size class will be somewhat higher (possibly 2 to 3%) while that of the 797
will be perhaps 1 to 2% lower.
documented. However, indications are that once the data is collected,
analyzed and validated, the results will fall into much the same range as
large OHT fleets with larger machines, e.g. 24H MG and 5000 series HEX,
being as much as 3 to 4% lower and smaller machines, e.g. 16H, being 1
or 2% higher.
1.1.6 - Maintenance Ratio

Definition:
Maintenance Ratio is a dimensionless ratio of maintenance and repair
man-hours to machine operating hours.
Maintenance & Repair Man-Hours

Maintenance Ratio charged =
Operating Hours
Description:
Maintenance Ratio is an indication of the amount of effort required to
keep equipment in service as well as the efficiency with which labor is
deployed and the effectiveness of the workforce in carrying out its duties.
Maintenance Ratio can be calculated as either “charged” or “direct”.
“Charged” Maintenance Ratio considers only workorder man-hours
(direct labor). Repair shop, e.g. Component Rebuild Center, labor is not
included in the calculation. “Overall” Maintenance Ratio includes all the
elements of “charged” Maintenance Ratio plus staff, supervision and idle
time.
Data Source(s):
Maintenance and repair man-hours are obtained from the work order
history. The result should include actual time spent working on all forms of
maintenance, repairs and modifications as well as inefficiencies that result
from inspection and diagnostic time or any delay or wait time for bay
space, parts, tooling, literature, repair support equipment, decision
making, etc.
Operating hours are obtained from machine service meter reading and
once again should include production delay hours. Note, hours obtained
from dispatch systems frequently do not agree with machine SMR due to
coding of production delays, etc.

Maintenance Ratio benchmarks vary significantly by machine model,
their relative size, age and design “maturity” and complexity.
Maintenance Ratio for large Off Highway Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class
is very well documented. The benchmark for a fleet of new trucks is 0.20
man-hours/ operating hour; that of a “mature” fleet (one that has
undergone its first round of major component rebuilds) is 0.30 man- hours/
operating hour.
Since by definition these benchmarks represent documented, best-in-
class performance sustainable over time, we are frequently asked to
assess performance through a range of results. The following (table 3)
represents our best judgment in this area.
MR Assessment / Characteristics
Excellent; high % of scheduled downtime; Equipment Mgmt. organization is highly
0.30 to 0.35
proactive.
0.35 to 0.40 Acceptable; majority of downtime is scheduled; substantial emphasis on Equipment Mgmt.
Marginal; approx. half of all downtime is scheduled; Equipment Mgmt. disciplines not fully
0.40 to 0.50
functional.
0.50 to 0.60 Fair; < 40% downtime is scheduled; minimal effort on Equipment Mgmt.
> 0.60 Poor; only PM’s are scheduled; Equipment Mgmt. organization is purely reactive.
Table 3: Site performance through range of Maintenance Ratios
known although it is believed that Maintenance Ratio for trucks in the 769
– 777 size class will be slightly lower while that of the 797 will be somewhat
higher.
documented. However, indications are that once Maintenance Ratio
data is collected, analyzed and validated, the results will fall into the
ranges shown in the table below. It is important to note here that
machine application will play a role in Maintenance Ratio. This is
particularly true in the case of large Track-type Tractors that can be
deployed as either production or support equipment. (Refer to table 4
below).
Machine / Model MR
D10 / D11 TTT’s 0.40 to 0.50
992 / 994 WL’s 0.35 to 0.45
16 MG 0.10 to 0.15
24 MG 0.15 to 0.20
5000 HEX 0.50 to 0.60
Table 4: Maintenance Ratio guidelines for mining machines
1.1.7 - Top Problems Summary

Definition:
The distribution of problems affecting a fleet of equipment ranked in terms
of MTBS, MTTR, impact on Availability and Costs.
Operating Hours
MTBS (by system) = (hours)
Number of Shutdowns (by system)
Downtime Hours (by system)

MTTR (by system) = (hours)
Number of Shutdowns (by system)
Downtime Hours (by system)

Impact on Availability (by system) = (1 – Availability )X
(total machine) (%)
Total Downtime Hours (machine)
Cost (by system)

Cost per Hour (by system) = (US & / hour)
Operating Hours
Description:
All mining support operations have limited resources. The most successful
operations are those that have a clear understanding of the problems
and issues facing them and are thus in a position to establish priorities in
order to focus their efforts and allocate the appropriate resources on
remedial or containment strategies through continuous improvement. The
identification and quantification of top problems by component (e.g.
engine, transmission, …), system (e.g. hydraulics, electrical, …) or even
process (e.g. PM) facilitates the understanding of the extent that each
area is having an influence on various criteria that comprise the success
of a mining support operation, i.e. shutdown frequency (MTBS), shutdown
duration (MTTR), impact on Availability and Costs. With this knowledge
the Project Manager is able to “drill down” to the key issues facing his site
and apply the necessary resources in the most efficient manner to
improve his situation.
Data Source(s):
Operating hours are obtained from machine service meter reading.
Note, hours obtained from dispatch systems frequently do not agree with
machine SMR due to coding of production delays, etc.
Shutdown count is obtained from machine workorder history and dispatch
system. Dispatch information must be used to account for shutdown
events that are not accounted for by a workorder. Shutdown count must
be determined individually for each area of the machine as well as for the
machine as a whole in order to assess not only the contribution of each
area but also to calculate Availability Index.
delay times should be included in the downtime history calculation. If
delay times are known, MTTR should be calculated both with and without
delays. As is the case with shutdown count, downtime must be
determined individually for each area of the machine as well as the
machine as a whole in order to assess the contribution of each area.
Total cost to support and maintain each of the systems and components
on the machine. At a minimum it is vital to know the breakdown for costs
of repairs and rebuilds of each major component on the machine. Most
recordskeeping systems we have studied do a fairly poor job of
documenting costs but if Project Management is to have any opportunity

to manage contract profitability, costs must be known.

There is no set of Benchmarks that is applicable to this metric. However,
over the course of investigation during EMR’s we developed a collection
of generic reference guidelines for large Off Highway Trucks in the 785 –
793 size class that can be used as a gauge to evaluate MTBS, MTTR and
impact on Availability. This reference defines what we believe to be a
reasonable level of acceptability for frequency of downtime events
(MTBS), duration of downtime events (MTTR) and impact on Availability for
each of the major areas on the machine.
The data is representative of a site operating at an Availability Index of
approximately 90% and is, of course, generic since actual results achieved
at any given mine are site-specific because results of this kind are a
function of not only application severity but also of the operating
environment, the maintenance the equipment receives and product
design shortcomings that are particular to machines either by model or
within a given range of serial numbers.
The “Generic Pareto Reference – Large Off Highway Trucks” included in
the Appendix can be used as a baseline until Project Management has
sufficient individual site-specific experience and history to determine how
this reference can be modified to fit the application in question.
Since there are many factors other than equipment management that
influence costs (labor rates, transportation costs, import duties, taxes,
etc.), it is impossible to define Benchmarks that are universally applicable
to any given machine model. This being the case, we recommend that
budgetary cost and component life projections be used to define target
cost per hour figures and that actual cost performance be compared to
those targets in order to determine if any particular area is out of line with
expectations.
1.1.8 - Asset Utilization

Definition:
The proportion of time that a machine is operating (operating hours)
divided by the total calendar time in the period, expressed as a
percentage.
Operating Hours
Asset Utilization = X 100 (%)
Total Calendar Hours
Description:
How effectively the Operations Department schedules equipment and
efficiently it utilizes that equipment has significant implications for
Maintenance. If machines are scheduled for use 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, Maintenance must respond by working with Operations to find
windows of opportunity in which maintenance and repairs can be
performed without increasing downtime. These opportunities typically
occur during scheduled shutdowns but they may also come at shift
change, lunch breaks or during operational delays such as during blasting
or fueling of equipment. In all circumstances, Operations and
Maintenance need to recognize that they are working together toward
common goals … high availability, good machine reliability and the
lowest possible cost per unit of production.
Data Source(s):
Operating hours are obtained from machine service meter reading and
should include production delay hours. Note, hours obtained from
dispatch systems frequently do not agree with machine SMU due to
coding of production delays, etc. Note that hours taken from machine
SMU will be higher than those taken from dispatch, oftentimes by as much
as 10 percent.
Total calendar hours is equal to the total time in the period to be

analyzed, e.g. 8760 hours / year, 720 hours / 30 day month, 168 hours /
week, etc.

Asset Utilization for large Off Highway Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class is
very well documented. Mines with highly effective equipment
management processes in place are able to achieve Asset Utilization of
90%, over 7800 operating hours per year. We believe that this Benchmark
is valid for other production mining equipment however the Benchmark
for less utilized, non-production equipment, although unknown, may be
significantly less.
1.1.9 - PIP / PSP Completion Rate

Definition:
A tracking tool used to monitor the status of implementation of factory
programs.
Factory program completion status is calculated as the ratio of programs
completed on a machine-by-machine basis relative to the number of
programs that are active and applicable at the time under consideration.
This ratio should be expressed as a percentage. Programs that are
defined as "after failure" should not be included in the calculation.
Data Source(s):
Factory programs are received on site via the dealer Technical
Communications staff and include all of the information necessary to
determine applicability and monitor their completion status, i.e. program
identification number, dates of issue and termination, and program type.
Machine serial number and hourmeter information obtained from the
machine history at the site.

Since factors such as parts availability can impact on management's
ability to complete a program and in some cases program execution can
be delayed to coincide with other related work (which may be a valid
decision on the part of management), there is no Benchmark that is
applicable to this metric. However, compliance with this discipline is
viewed as critical to the success of a project and common sense would
dictate that a higher percentage of completion of outstanding programs
is desirable. Clearly, no program should be permitted to run beyond its
termination date without being addressed unless it is an after failure only
program.
2.1 Preventive Maintenance

The following metrics are indicators of the performance and / or
contributions of the Preventive Maintenance process to the end results of
the project, i.e. equipment reliability and availability.
2.1.1 - MTBS after PM
T otal Operating Hours to First Stop (hours)

MTBS after PM =
Number of PM Services
The average operating hours to the first stop after each PM service is a
valid indication of PM quality and effectiveness. The Benchmark (best in
class) for large Off Highway Trucks is 105 hours; a realistic target is 2 to 3
times the overall MTBS. Tracking and trending this metric monthly offers a
reasonable representation of PM quality and effectiveness.
2.1.2 - Unavailability PM
PM Downtime Hours
Unavailability PM = (1 - Availability) X X 100 (%)
Unavailability due to Preventive Maintenance quantifies the impact of PM

on availability. There is no Benchmark associated with this metric but a
reasonably valid target is in the range of 2.75 to 3.25% for large Off
Highway Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class.
The result of this measure should be taken in context with MTBS after PM. If
unavailability due to PM is below the range and MTBS after PM is low, it is a
safe assumption that insufficient time and effort is being placed on PM.
Conversely, if unavailability due to PM is above the range and MTBS after PM
is high, one can assume that the site is placing substantial emphasis on
the value of PM.
2.1.3 - MTTR PM
Total PM Downtime Hours (hours)

MTTR PM =
Number of PM Services
The average downtime hours dedicated to PM is an indication of PM
efficiency. There is no Benchmark associated with this measure but a
reasonable target is in the 7.75 to 8.5 hour range for large Off Highway
Trucks that are on a 250 hour PM service interval. The target for
equipment that is on a 500 hour PM service interval is higher, i.e. double
that of the 250 hour interval. Once again, if average PM downtime is the
range, it may indicate and MTBS after PM is low, it is a safe assumption that
insufficient time and effort is being placed on PM. Conversely, if average
PM downtime is above the range and MTBS after PM is high, one can assume
that the site is placing substantial emphasis on the value of PM.
Additionally, one should consider the impact of efficiency factors such as
facilities, tooling, training, planning & scheduling, etc. when assessing
MTTR PM.
2.1.4 - Service Accuracy

A measurement of Preventive Maintenance execution timeliness based
on a statistical calculation that predicts the probability that the next PM
service will occur within the recommended range (+/- 25 hours of target
interval). The calculation is based upon past performance and assumes
that PM intervals are normally distributed about the mean. The Benchmark
for S.A. is 95% but an aggressive target that will yield excellent results is
90%.
2.1.5 - Backlogs executed during PM

Backlogs executed during Preventive Maintenance is a good indication
of how well the organization is using the “window of opportunity”
presented by PM to maintain the equipment at a standard that will
enhance product reliably. There is no Benchmark or target for this
measure.
2.1.6 - Backlogs generated during PM

The number of defects identified and entered into the Backlog
Management system during the execution of Preventive Maintenance.
Since this measure is a direct function of the number of machines being
monitored as well as their condition, no Benchmarks or targets are
applicable. Backlogs generated during PM quantifies the use of the
“window of opportunity” presented during the PM shutdown for defect
detection (an element of Condition Monitoring).
2.2 Condition Monitoring

The following metrics are indicators of the performance and / or
contributions of the Condition Monitoring process to the end results of the
project.
2.2.1 - Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)
MTBF Operating Hours

= (hours)
(Mean Time Between Failures) Number of Failures
The average operating time between equipment failures; the inverse of

failure frequency, expressed in hours. Failures may be the result of
technical product issues, i.e. equipment unreliability, or due to
maintenance / repair neglect, i.e. equipment management
ineffectiveness in the area of problem avoidance. We have not
established a Benchmark for MTBF and do not have sufficient confidence
at this time to provide a reasonable target. (Please see the Glossary for
our definition of equipment Failure.)
2.2.2 - Unavailability Unscheduled

Unscheduled Downtime
Unavailability U/S = (1 – Availability) X X 100 (%)
Total Downtime
Unavailability due to unscheduled downtime quantifies the impact of
unscheduled events on availability. There is no Benchmark associated
with this metric but a reasonably valid target is < 2% for large Off Highway
Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class. If unavailability due to unscheduled
downtime is significantly higher than 2%, it is reasonable to assume that
gaps exist in the detect-plan-execute cycle therefore improvements to
the Condition Monitoring, Planning & Scheduling and/or repair execution
areas will be necessary. Increasing unavailability due to unscheduled
downtime is a valid predictor of pending problems and may very well
predict future shortages of manpower and facilities.
2.2.3 - Failure Reduction

Unscheduled hours _ Unscheduled hours
(6 months RA) (last month)
Failure Reduction = X 100 (%)
(FR) Unscheduled hours
(6 month rolling average)
Failure Reduction is a means of quantifying the impact of Condition

Monitoring in its efforts toward failure / problem avoidance. Since
unscheduled events are inherently more difficult and inefficient to deal
with in terms of the time required to make unscheduled (unplanned)
repairs, Failure Reduction should be the primary focus of Condition
Monitoring activities. Because the opportunity to improve in this area is
highly dependent upon the amount of unscheduled downtime taking
place at the site, there is no Benchmark or target for Failure Reduction. In
any event, the result should be positive indicating a decline in the
percentage of unscheduled downtime.
2.2.4 - Condition Monitoring Total Savings
CM Total Savings = CM Cost Saving – CM Program Cost (US$ )
Condition Monitoring Total Savings defines the “Value Proposition” for

Condition Monitoring. In other words, the total savings generated by
Condition Monitoring (cost of after-failure repairs – cost of preventive,
before-failure repairs) must be greater than the cost of implementation
and execution of the Condition Monitoring program. There is no
Benchmark for this metric but the target should be a positive value (net
savings as a result of Condition Monitoring).
2.2.5 - Total Backlogs Generated
Backlogs Generated = Total Backlogs Generated in the Period

(Total)

Management system during a specified period (typically one month). This
metric assesses the Condition Monitoring effort in and ability to
successfully detect potential problems before failure. Since this measure is
a direct function of the number of machines being monitored, there is no

Benchmark or target.
2.2.6 - Working on Target
Working on Target = % Backlogs on Problem List
The percentage of Backlogs generated which address issues that appear

on the “Top 10” historical problem list. The result yields the % of Condition
Monitoring actions that are “On Target” relative to the key issues affecting
site performance. There is no Benchmark or target for this metric however,
if all issues on the problem list are not producing Backlogs, the Condition
Monitoring effort may be misdirected.
2.2.7 - Backlogs Generated by Origin

Backlogs Generated = Backlogs Generated in the Period by area of origin
(by Origin)
Backlogs Generated by Origin identifies which areas that are or are not
contributing to efforts by Condition Monitoring in failure detection. There is
no Benchmark for Backlogs Generated by Origin, however, if the quantity
of Backlogs generated by operators, inspectors, the PM crew, the shop
crew, etc is low, additional emphasis should be placed on the offending
party(s) to encourage their participation in the defect detection process.
Conversely, if the percentage of “shop-found” defects is
disproportionately high, the other areas must be encouraged to increase
their involvement since “shop found” defects are typically far less
efficiently executed due to the inability to plan the workload. There are no
Benchmarks or targets related to this metric.
2.2.8 - Detection Level
Potential Failure Recorded Backlogs

= X 100 (%)
Detection (PFD) Total defects pending
This metric is based on a comparison between the number of Backlogs

recorded in the system and the defects that can be detected in an
inspection of a randomly selected sample of machines (10% of total fleet
at minimum). Although inspections are limited to visual inspection, the
Potential Failure Detection level can be used to assess the level of
detection of Condition Monitoring.
2.3 Backlog Management

The following metrics are used to evaluate the ability of the Backlog
Management process to prioritize, control and manage problems
identified through Condition Monitoring such that they do not result in
unnecessary downtime.
2.3.1 - Total Backlogs Pending

The total number of defects identified by Condition Monitoring and
pending in the Backlog Management process. An indication of the
pending workload and risk for failure. Since this number is dependent
upon the size of the fleet being managed, there is no Benchmark or
target for this metric.
2.3.2 - Backlogs Pending by Machine

The total number of defects per machine identified by Condition
Monitoring and pending in the Backlog Management process. There is no
Benchmark for this metric, however a reasonable target is that there
should be no more than five pending Backlog repairs per machine.
2.3.3 - Total Backlogs Generated

Backlogs Generated = Total Backlogs Generated in the Period
(Total)

Management system during a specified period (typically one month). This
metric assesses the Condition Monitoring effort in and ability to
successfully detect potential problems before failure. Since this measure is
a direct function of the number of machines being monitored, there is no
Benchmark or target. Backlog generation should be viewed in the context
of % scheduled downtime and, if the percentage of scheduled downtime
is low, the total number of Backlogs generated should be correspondingly

high.
2.3.4 - Total Backlogs Executed
Backlogs Executed = Total Backlogs Executed in the Period

(Total)
The number of Backlog repairs performed during a specified period

(typically one month). This metric evaluates the ability of the maintenance
organization to react appropriately to correct defects identified through
the Condition Monitoring process. Since this measure is related to the
number of Backlogs in the system, there is no Benchmark or target,
however, there should be a balance between the number of Backlogs
generated and executed.
2.3.5 - Estimated Labor To Repair

The total estimated repair labor man-hours required to execute all of the
pending Backlogs that have been generated. This metric is an indication
of severity of the Backlog workload and the potential availability lost if
manpower resources are insufficient to accomplish the task at hand.
There is no Benchmark for this metric but a reasonable target is that the
total estimated repair labor man-hours required to clean up the Backlog
list should be < 5% of available man-hours labor for the month.
2.3.6 - Backlog Status Summary

The Backlog Status Summary defines the number of pending Backlogs
that are waiting for planning (“Red phase”), waiting for parts / resources
(“Blue phase”), and waiting to be executed (“Green phase”). There is no
Benchmark or target for the Backlog Status Summary however this metric
analyzed to identify any weak area(s) in the detect-plan-execute cycle
that may be delaying the Backlog repair execution process.
2.3.7 - Backlogs > 30 Days Old

Measured from the date the Backlog was generated, this metric assesses
the quality and timeliness of the response of the Backlog Management
system in its ability to respond proactively to eliminate potential problems.
It is important to note that Backlogs are potential failures, thus Backlog
age is an indication of the risk of failure that a site is under. There is no

Benchmark for this measure however an aggressive target is that no
Backlogs are greater than 30 days old.
2.4 Planning and Scheduling

The following metrics are used to evaluate how well the Planning and
Scheduling process is organized and functioning to ensure that planned
activities can be accomplished both efficiently and effectively and that
they do not result in unnecessary downtime.
2.4.1 - Percentage Scheduled Downtime
Scheduled Downtime Hours

% Scheduled Downtime = X 100 (%)
A high percentage of unscheduled downtime incidents results in very

inefficient use of resources and excessive costs since personnel are
frequently shuffled from job to job and facilities and manpower
requirements need to be sufficiently large to accommodate huge swings
in the number of machines down for repairs. Data collected from mine
studies has shown that the average downtime for unplanned /
unscheduled work is up to eight times greater than the downtime for
planned / scheduled activity.
The Benchmark for percentage of scheduled downtime is 80% of
maintenance and repair downtime activity is executed on a scheduled
basis. A reasonably aggressive target for most sites is 60%.
2.4.2 - Schedule Compliance by Hours
Scheduled PM & Repair Hours Executed

Schedule Compliance = X 100 (%)
(by hours) PM & Repair Hours Scheduled
Schedule Compliance (by hours) is the ratio of scheduled Preventive

Maintenance and repair downtime hours actually executed to the
Preventive Maintenance and repair downtime hours scheduled. There is
no Benchmark for this metric but the target should be in the range of 90 to
100%. If the result is consistently 100%, it may be an indication that the

schedule is too conservative (does not provide sufficient “stretch”.
Conversely, if the result is consistently low, it could mean that the schedule
is too ambitious, the workforce is inefficient, or that the amount of
unscheduled downtime during the period was such that it interfered with
work that had been previously scheduled.
2.4.3 - Schedule Compliance by Events
Scheduled PM & Repair Events Executed

Schedule Compliance = X 100 (%)
(by events) PM & Repair Events Scheduled
Schedule Compliance (by events) is the ratio of scheduled Preventive

Maintenance and repair events actually performed to the Preventive
Maintenance and repair events scheduled. Once again, there is no
Benchmark for this metric but the target should be in the range of 90 to
100%. Just as was the case for Schedule Compliance by hours, if the result
is consistently 100%, it may be an indication that the schedule is too
conservative (does not provide sufficient “stretch”. Conversely, if the result
is consistently low, it could mean that the schedule is too ambitious, the
workforce is inefficient, or that the amount of unscheduled downtime
during the period was such that it interfered with work that had been
previously scheduled.
2.4.4 - Components Exchanged (scheduled)
PCR’s Scheduled & Executed

Components Exchanged = X 100 (%)
PCR’s Executed
Components Exchanged is the ratio of component replacements

scheduled and actually replaced to components replacements
scheduled. There is no Benchmark for this metric but the target should be
100%.
2.4.5 - Estimated Time To Repair Pending Backlogs

The total estimated repair downtime hours required to execute all of the
pending Backlogs that have been generated. At the time a repair request
is entered (Backlog generated) the Estimated Time to Repair (ETTR) must
be identified to permit effective planning of required corrective actions.

This metric is an indication of extent of the Backlog workload and the
potential availability lost if resources are insufficient to accomplish the task
at hand. There is no Benchmark or target for this metric; it serves as a tool
for the Planning process to enable it to “manage” availability by
scheduling work in such a way that the availability goal can be met.
2.4.6 - Estimated Time To Replace Overdue Components

The total estimated repair downtime hours required to replace all overdue
components. Standard jobs for component replacement will forecast the
estimated time to replace each component. This metric is an indication of
extent of the component replacement workload and the potential
availability lost if resources are insufficient to accomplish those tasks.
There is no Benchmark for this metric but a reasonable target is that the
downtime required for component replacement should not result in more
than 2% unavailability. It is important to note here that since fleets tend to
come due for component replacement in “batches”, thus this metric is
highly variable and must be looked at over the long-term … 12-24 months.
Just as with the ETTR for Backlogs, this measure serves as a tool for the
Planning process to enable it to “manage” availability by scheduling work
in such a way that the availability goal can be met.
2.4.7 - Estimated Time To Execute Factory Programs

The total estimated repair downtime hours required to perform all overdue
factory programs, i.e. PIP & PSP’s. The program will typically define the
estimated time to execute each program. This metric is an indication of
extent of the program execution workload and the potential availability
lost if resources are insufficient to accomplish those tasks. There is no
Benchmark for this metric but, if one assumes that program execution is
relatively current, a reasonable target is that the downtime required for
component replacement should not result in more than 1% unavailability.
It is important to note that since programs are generated to cover fleets
of equipment, those programs tend to come in “batches”, thus this metric
is highly variable and must be looked at over the long-term … 6-12
months. Just as with the ETTR for Backlogs and component replacement,
this measure serves as a tool for the Planning process to enable it to
“manage” availability by scheduling work in such a way that the
availability goal can be met.
2.5 Parts Management

The following metrics are used to determine how well maintenance
activities are supported by the parts inventory and evaluate the
relationship between the Parts, Planning & Scheduling and Maintenance
Departments in their efforts to avoid unnecessary parts-related downtime.
2.5.1 - Warehouse Service Fill Level (instantaneous)
Parts Orders Closed at 1st Request

Service Fill Level = X 100 (%)
(instantaneous)
Total Parts Orders
Instantaneous Service Fill Level is a parts management efficiency indicator

that quantifies the percentage of individual parts requests entered
against the on-site parts warehouse for repairs (including Backlog parts
requests) and filled / closed at the first call. A reflection of the level of
satisfaction of on-site parts warehouse performance. The Benchmark for
Instantaneous Service Fill Level is 95%. An aggressive target is > 90%.
2.5.2 - Service Fill Level (24 hours)
Parts Orders Closed in 1st 24 Hours

Service Fill Level = X 100 (%)
(after 24 hours)
Total Parts Orders
Service Fill Level after 24 hours is a parts management efficiency indicator

that quantifies the percentage of individual parts requests entered
against the on-site parts warehouse for repairs (including Backlog parts
requests) and filled / closed in the first 24 hours after the first call. A
reflection of the level of satisfaction of on-site parts warehouse
performance. We do not have sufficient data to define a Benchmark but
an aggressive target is 100%.
2.5.3 - Unavailability Parts
Parts Delay Downtime

Unavailability PD = (1 – Availability) X X 100 (%)
Total Downtime
The material contained herein is confidential and is not to be copied or distributed without written permission by owner
Unavailability due to parts delays quantifies the impact of parts delay

events on availability. There is no Benchmark associated with this metric
but a reasonable target is < .5%. If unavailability (downtime) due to parts
delays is significantly higher than .5%, it may signify potential problems with
inventory quality / quality and/or a higher than normal percentage of
unplanned downtime, i.e. the inability of the maintenance organization to
detect problems in advance of failure and plan & schedule the work and
associated resources accordingly. If parts inventory quality / quality is
found to be an issue, it may be due either to the fact that the
maintenance organization is not doing a good job of defining the parts
inventory support requirements to the Parts Department or that the Parts
Department is not delivering on its obligation to support the site with the
required parts.
2.5.4 - Emergency Response Time

Emergency Response Time quantifies the average response time (in days)
to satisfy parts requests that cannot be filled instantaneously. This
parameter works and should be analyzed in conjunction with
Instantaneous Service Fill Level. There is no Benchmark or target for this
metric.
2.5.5 - Parts Inventory Rotation

Parts Inventory Rotation is defined as the annual turnover of parts held in
the on-site parts warehouse. No Benchmark is available for this parameter.
Defining a realistic target for this metric is highly dependent upon site
logistics of the specific operation including transportation, the capacity
and design of the parts warehouse, the remoteness of the site, costs
associated with carrying the inventory and the specific requirements of
the site in terms of any availability guarantees that may be in place.
2.5.6 - Emergency Orders

Emergency Orders quantifies the percentage of parts orders that are
placed against the system on an emergency basis, i.e. “panic mode”.
The percentage of Emergency Orders is another method of analyzing the
extent to which the maintenance organization is behaving pro-actively
and control of the fleet. There is no Benchmark or target for this metric.
2.5.7 - Inventory (items)

This metric quantifies the number of individual line items maintained on-
site in the parts inventory. Because this is proportional to the size of the
fleet being supported, there is no Benchmark or target for this metric.
Trending inventory levels over a 6 to 12 month period and relating the
trend to fleet performance results such as MTBS, MTTR and % of scheduled
work, is one way of determining the impact of parts support on the overall
site performance.
2.5.8 - Inventory (value)

This metric quantifies the value of the on-site parts inventory. Here again,
because this is proportional to the size of the fleet being supported, there
is no Benchmark or target for this metric. Trending inventory value over a 6
to 12 month period and relating the trend to fleet performance results
such as MTBS, MTTR and % of scheduled work, is one way of determining
the impact of parts support on the overall site performance.
2.6 Repair Management

The following Repair Management metrics are indicators of the adequacy
of the maintenance personnel, facilities, tooling and support equipment
and how well those resources are organized and managed to perform
efficient & effective repairs while contributing to efficiency, cost and
availability objectives.
2.6.1 - MTTR (shop service)

Total Shop Repair Downtime (hours)
MTTR shop =
Number of Shop Repairs
The average downtime hours (including delays) required to execute shop

repairs. There is no Benchmark or target associated with this measure.
Actual results will vary significantly based upon the nature of the repair,
whether it is scheduled or unscheduled and the extent to which repairs
are grouped for optimum efficiency.
2.6.2 - MTTR (field)
Total Field Repair Downtime (hours)

MTTR field =
Number of Field Repairs
The average downtime hours (including delays & response time) required
to execute field repairs. There is no Benchmark associated with this
measure but a reasonable target is <1 hour. It should be noted here that
the field service crew is the “first line of defense” for the maintenance
organization and, as such, their attention should be focused on rapid
remedial actions and fast, decisive decision-making. Consequently, if the
field service crew determines that a repair can be better performed in the
shop environment, they should release it to the shop unless those
resources are unavailable. Thus, the target for MTTRfield is relatively low, <1
hour, and unless the machine is not mobile, higher quality and more
efficient repairs can be performed in the shop.
2.6.3 - MTTR (shop service / without delays)
Total Shop Repair Downtime (hours)

MTTR shop =
Number of Shop Repairs
The average downtime hours (excluding delays) required to execute shop

repairs. There is no Benchmark or target associated with this measure. This
measure enables site management to assess the impact of delays on
shop repair execution and, if delays are found to be a problem, take
corrective actions accordingly.
2.6.4 - MTTR (field / without delays)
Total Field Repair Downtime (hours)

MTTR field =
Number of Field Repairs
The average downtime hours (excluding delays & response time) required
to execute field repairs. There is no Benchmark associated with this
measure but a reasonable target is <.5 hour. This measure enables site
management to assess the impact of delays on field repair execution
and, if delays or response time are found to be problems, take the

corresponding corrective actions.
2.6.5 - MTBS after Repairs
Total Operating Hours to First Stop (hours)

MTBS after Repairs =
Number of Repairs
The average operating hours to the first stop after each repair is an
indication of repair quality and effectiveness. There is no Benchmark
available for this metric. A realistic target depends upon the level of
current performance, i.e. if repair quality is an issue (technicians are
creating more problems than they are correcting), the target should be
much higher than if repair quality is relatively good.
2.6.6 - % Redo
Σ Repair Redo Man-Hours
Redo = X 100 (%)
Σ Repair Man-Hours
Percentage Redo is a measure of repair effectiveness. It is the proportion

or percentage of man-hours labor dedicated to redo (correcting repair
errors) to the total number of man-hours labor dedicated to all repairs.
There is no Benchmark for this metric but a reasonable target is that redo
should be < 2% of total repair man-hours.
2.6.7 - Unavailability Delays
Delay Downtime
Unavailability D = (1 – Availability) X X 100 (%)
Total Downtime
Unavailability due to delay downtime quantifies the impact of delays

associated with shop and field repairs on availability. There is no
Benchmark associated with this metric but a reasonable target is < 1%. If
unavailability (downtime) due to delays is significantly higher than 1%, it
may be related to inadequate manpower, excessive field response times,
poor communications to the field service crew, excessive workload,
and/or a higher than normal amount of unscheduled work.
2.6.8 - Contamination Control

The “Star” contamination control rating scheme is a valid indication of the
organizations ability to provide and maintain a working environment and
work procedures that promote and support high quality repair execution.
The Benchmark is “5 Star”.
2.7 Component Management
2.7.1 - Component Life Target Achieved

_ Life Target
Components Exchanged >
Component Life
= X 100 (%)
Target Achieved Total Components Exchanged
The Component Life Target Achieved quantifies the percentage of
components that are reaching target life before component exchange.
There is no Benchmark for this measure but a reasonable target is that
100% of components achieve target life to rebuild.
2.7.2 - Components Scheduled
Components Scheduled Component Exchanges

= X 100 (%)
Scheduled Total Components Exchanged
The Components Scheduled metric quantifies the percentage of
components that are exchanged on a scheduled basis as a percentage
of the total number of components exchanged in the period. There is no
Benchmark for this measure but a reasonable target is that 100% of
components are exchanged on a scheduled basis.
2.7.3 - Component Replacement Costs
Component Actual PCR Costs

Replacement = X 100 (%)
Cost Budgeted / Target PCR Costs
The Component Replacement Cost metric quantifies the ratio of actual

component replacement costs to budgeted (target) costs. There is no
Benchmark for this measure but a reasonable target is that actual
component replacement costs should not exceed (< or = 100%) budget.
2.7.4 - Unavailability Component Replacement

Comp. Replacement DT
Unavailability CR = (1 – Availability) X X 100 (%)
Total Downtime
Unavailability due to component replacement downtime quantifies the
impact of component replacement events on availability. There is no
Benchmark associated with this metric but a reasonable target is < 2%. If
unavailability (downtime) due to component replacement is significantly
higher than 2%, it may signify potential problems with component
inventory quality / quality, component rebuild (CRC) turnaround time,
and/or a higher than normal percentage of unscheduled component
replacement events. If the component inventory quality / quality is found
to be an issue, it may be due either to the fact that the maintenance
organization is not doing a good job of communicating the component
replacement plan the Parts Department and/or CRC or that the Parts
Department and/or CRC is not delivering on its obligation to support the
site with the components they require.
2.7.5 - Availability Index after Component Exchange
The Availability Index during the first six months after major component
exchange is a very good indication of the quality of work being
performed during component exchange. This can be calculated by
monitoring Availability Index for the individual machine for the period.
There is no Benchmark for this metric but a valid target is that the
Availability Index during the first six months after major component
exchange is > 88%.
2.7.6 - PCR Compliance
PCR PCR’s Planned, Scheduled & Executed

= X 100 (%)
Compliance Total PCR’s Planned & Scheduled
PCR Compliance defines the number of components that are replaced

on a planned and scheduled basis as a percentage of the total number
of components planned and scheduled. There is no Benchmark for this
measure but a reasonable target is that 100% of components that are
planned and scheduled for replacement are indeed executed per the
plan.
2.7.7 - Backlogs Executed during Component Exchange
Backlogs B’logs Executed during Component Exchg

Executed = X 100 (%)
with PCR Total Backlogs Pending
Backlogs executed during component exchange is a good indication of

how well the organization is using the “window of opportunity” presented
by component exchange to bring the equipment up to a standard that
will permit it to perform reliably. There is no Benchmark for this measure but
the target should be that 100% of items on the pending Backlog list are
executed during the component replacement activity.
2.8 Human Resources and Training
2.8.1HR - Unavailability Personnel Delays
Personnel Delay Downtime

Unavailability PD = (1 – Availability) X X 100 (%)
Total Downtime
Unavailability due to personnel delay downtime quantifies the impact of

personnel delays (waiting on manpower) on availability. There is no
Benchmark associated with this metric but a reasonable target is < .5%. If
unavailability (downtime) due to personnel delays is significantly higher
than .5%, it may signify potential problems with manpower staffing levels,
higher than normal workload (an abundance of Backlogged repairs),
workforce inefficiency, and/or a higher than normal amount of
unscheduled work, i.e. work that enjoys the benefits of planning &
scheduling are typically executed far more efficiently than work that is
performed in an environment of constantly changing priorities such as the

one created when a high percentage of the workload is unscheduled.
2.8.2HR - Effective Man-Hours

Effective Man = Σ Labor Hours (hands on) present in the month [ h ]
Hours
The number of hands-on labor hours available per month is a metric that
helps understand / measure the manpower available on site. This metric is
use as a reference for other metrics.
2.8.3HR - Personnel Hands-On to Machine Ratio
Total Hands On Technicians

HO Personnel – = (-)
Machines Ratio Number of Machines
This ratio gives us a quick relationship between the work force on-site and
the number of machines. This metric can be used as a quick reference
and must be combined with other metrics to better understand the
personnel situation on-site.
2.8.4HR - Direct Maintenance Personnel

Direct Maintenance = Quantity of Hands-On Technicians (-)
Personnel
This metric documents the number of hands-on technicians. The total

number of technicians on-site can be easily compared with other metrics
and other sites with similar operational characteristics.
2.8.5. HR - Personnel Total to Machine Ratio
Total Personnel
Total Personnel – = [-]
Machines Ratio Number of Machines
This metric establishes the relationship between the total personnel on-site
and the number of machines. Total personnel includes all people on site,
technicians, planners, supervisors, secretaries, administration personnel,
etc.
2.8.6HR - Total Maintenance Personnel
Total Maintenance = Total Quantity of Maintenance [-]

Personnel Personnel
This metric asks for the total maintenance personnel on-site. How many
people we have on-site to support the fleet of equipment. This metric in
conjunction with metrics in 2.8.3, 2.8.4 & 2.8.5 gives us a dimension of the
maintenance crew on-site and can be compared with other similar
operations to support the understanding of personnel efficiency.
All the above metrics are very straightforward and can be easily
obtained. The documentation of these figures link with the characteristics
of the fleet and the on-site operation will give us a quick reference for
future studies.
2.8.7HR - Overtime to total Effective Hours Ratio
Ov ertime hours in the Period

Ov ertime Ratio = X 100 (%)
Total effective hours in the Period
The overtime ratio measures the amount of extra hours required to satisfy
the maintenance operation as a percentage of the total effective hours
available in the period. Overtime may be an indication of labor needs or
extra maintenance demand in a particular period of time. Constant
overtime levels should be an indicator to consider to review and possibly
to improve the on-site organization structure.
2.8.8HR – Labor Hours Covered by Workorders

Total Labor Hours in Workorders
Labor Hours in Work = X 100 (%)
Order Total effective hours in the Period
The labor hours captured in the workorders are charged to specific

machines whenever a technician is assigned and working on that
particular machine. This ratio is an indication of technician idle time. Idle
time includes breaks for lunch and shift changes. The ideal situation would
be to have a ratio very close to 100%, indicating a full usage of the labor
available. Be careful in those cases in which the on-site operation
“justifies” technician labor hours by charging 100% of their hours to the
machines being serviced.
2.8.1T – Training Hours / Labor Hours
Training Hours Total Training Hours in the Period

= X 100 (%)
Ratio Total Labor Hours av ailable in the
Period
This metric, used by the International Labor Organization, gives us the
relationship between the hours invested in training and the total available
labor hours in the period. This organization considers that a minimum of 1%
of every 100 labor man-hours be dedicated to training to be acceptable.
We don’t have results for our mining projects but we believe that if it were
known it would be much higher than the OIT target.
2.8.2T – Training Hours by Systems (vs. Problems)
Training Hours = Training Hours on “System A”

X 100 (%)
Ratio by Systems Total Training hours in the Period
This metric gives us the opportunity to assess if the training efforts are
addressing the actual problems that the maintenance organization is
facing. The relationship between the Ranking of Problems (Top 5 or 10)
obtained from the machine repair history and the hours trained in that
particular subject or machine area must be very strong. The training
needs detection (TND) process should consider this ranking of problems
and schedule training activities to support the organization to be better

prepared to solve those problems.
2.8.3T – Training Program Compliance
Training Program = Training hours completed

X 100 (%)
Compliance Total training hours scheduled
The training compliance metric gives us an indication of how well the on-
site operation is following the training activities scheduled. It is also an
indication of the importance that is given to the training activities. Are we
complying with what we scheduled?
2.8.4T – Competencies Required
Competencies defined in each role &

Competencies = responsibilities X Number of People in the
Required
corresponding Roles
To obtain this metric, total number of competencies required, the on-site

organization must have a clear definition of the roles and responsibilities
for each of the positions in the organization and the number of people
assigned to each of those particular roles. This metric gives us an
indication as to how many competencies we need in order to do the job
efficiency and effectively.
2.8.5T - Competencies Satisfied
% of Personnel Competencies Certified

Competencies = X 100 (%)
Satisfied Competencies Required
The percentage of Competencies satisfied will give us an understanding

of how well the organization is prepared to perform the maintenance
tasks. This metric compares the number of competencies that have been
certified in a formal certification process against the total competencies
required.
2.8.6T - Personnel Skills Inventory Completion
Personnel Skills Skills / Competencies in Inventory

= X 100 (%)
Inventory Total Personnel Skills
The Personnel Skills Inventory is probably the foundation for any training
detection needs or gap analysis study. The personnel skills must be
surveyed and kept in an updated Data Base.
2.9 Continuous Improvement

2.9.1 - Top Problems with C.I. Projects
CI working on
= % of Continuous Improvement Projects on
Target (CIOT)
Problem Ranking
Top 1-2 %
Top 3-5 %
Top 6-10 %
The Ranking of Problems is based on the Machine Repair History and

represents those problems or areas that most affect the final performance
of the fleet. The % of CI projects dedicated to solve those problems is an
indication of effective communications and clear management to direct
the organization efforts where they are most needed.
2.9.2 - Active C.I. Projects
Active CI
Projects
= Number of CI projects in process [ - ]
This metric, the number of CI projects that are in process or active, gives
us an understanding of the magnitude of the CI effort and how active the
organization is in the search for solutions or optimizations.
2.9.3 - C.I. Projects Closed during Period
CI Projects
Closed
= Number of CI projects closed in the Period [ - ]
This metric is an indication of the regularity of the CI process in place, that

is how many CI projects are we closing in a period of time, or how many
solution proposals are we delivering to the organization. We recommend
measuring this result on a monthly basis.
2.9.4 - Average C.I. Project Execution Time
CI Project
Execution = Average days to complete CI projects [days]
Time
This metric in conjunction with 2.9.3 above gives us a measure of the CI
process efficiency. Average days to close the CI Projects coupled with
the regularity of delivery measured by CI Projects Closed in the period
provides us a means of telling if the CI pipeline has the ability to deliver
results in a reasonably constant timeframe.
2.9.5 - C.I. Projects Opened during Period
CI Projects = Number of CI Projects generated in the Period [ - ]

Opened
The number of CI projects opened or generated in the period is an

indication of maturity of the CI process. This metric measures if the
maintenance organization is continually looking for solutions and better
ways to do things. It is also is an indication of the effectiveness of the
Problem / Opportunity detection process and management.
2.9.6 - C.I. Project Delivered Value
CI Delivered Prov en Benefits due to CI solutions

= [$]
Value Implemented
This metric measures the effectiveness of the CI process in place through

the proven value delivered to the operation. This value can be a
recorded direct savings, an increase in productivity, an improvement in
availability translated into more equipment hours to produce and / or
maintenance labor reduction, etc. Accurate records are a must in order
to be able to calculate and validate the results of this metric.
Glossary of Terms
Performance Metric: A term used to describe the outcome of any
process used to collect, analyze, interpret and present quantitative data.
A measurement parameter that enables performance against some pre-
defined Target or Benchmark to be monitored. A measurement used to
gauge performance of a function, operation or business relative to past
results or others.
Key Performance Indicator: Also known as KPI; a top level

Performance Metric. The collection of KPI's used to describe performance
of a particular project may vary from site to site, by product, application
and even one's perspective, i.e. dealer & customer, Operations &
Maintenance Depts., Project & Contract Controls Dept. NOTE: All KPI's are
Performance Metrics but Performance Metrics are not always KPI's.
Target: A desired goal; a standard by which a Performance Metric can

be measured or judged. The Target for a particular Performance Metric
can be somewhat arbitrary and will likely vary by product, application or
specific site. The Target is frequently determined by customer needs, his
expectations and / or contractual commitments, and manufacturers’
specifications.
Benchmark (noun): A world-class performance standard relative to a

specific Performance Metric; represents and quantifies "best practice" of
an operation or of specific functions within that operation according to a
specified Performance Metric. A Benchmark may vary by product but, by
contrast, is much less arbitrary than a Target. A Benchmark is determined
by and represents actual, documented, sustainable performance over
time relative to some Performance Metric.
Shutdown / Stoppage: An event that takes a machine out of service.

Shutdowns may be scheduled or unscheduled and include all types of
maintenance and repair activities except daily lubes, refueling and
inspections executed during lube or refueling activities. Operational
stoppages, e.g. shift changes, lunch breaks, etc., are not included as
shutdowns. “Grouped” repairs count as a single shutdown. Shutdown
count is independent of event duration or complexity, i.e. a five-minute
event counts the same as a 100-hour event and a headlight replacement
counts the same as a catastrophic major component failure.
Failure: The inability of a device or system to perform in its required

function … the cessation of proper functioning or performance, for
example a power failure. Failures may be the result of technical product
issues, i.e. equipment unreliability, or due to maintenance / repair neglect,
i.e. equipment management ineffectiveness in the area of problem
avoidance.
Total Calendar Hours: Total time in the period to be analyzed, e.g.

8760 hours / year, 720 hours / 30 day month, 168 hours / week, etc.
Scheduled Hours: Time that a machine is scheduled for operations.

Typically determined by the mine Planning and Operations Departments
in conjunction with their overall production targets.
Unscheduled Hours: Hours outside the plan; lost time that result from
accidents, strikes, weather, acts of God, any holidays that are observed,
etc. (typically defined by the customer or contained in the Customer
Support Agreement or MARC).
Available Hours: Time that a machine is capable of functioning in the

intended operation.
Operating Hours: Time that a machine is actually operating in the

intended function.
Stand-by Hours: Time that a machine is available for operation but is

not being used, e.g. no operator available, "over-trucked", etc. Also
known as "Ready line" hours.
Production Delay Hours: Time that a machine is operational but is

waiting with the engine running due to blasting, loader wait time, etc.
Production delay hours are frequently not accounted for separately and
are included in the operating hours tabulation. One the other hand,
some dispatch systems do track production delay hours in an effort to
minimize and manage them. In either case, lost hours that result from
production delays should be reconciled and not counted against
machine availability.
Operational Delay Hours: Time that a machine is available for

operation but is not being used due to shift changes, lunch breaks,
meetings, prayers, etc. Just as was the case for production delay hours,
lost hours that result from operational delays should be reconciled and
never counted against machine availability. On the other hand, policy at
many mines ignores operational delay hours altogether and therefore,
does not credit operational delay hours as either scheduled or available
hours.
Downtime Hours: Time that a machine is not available for operation;

out of service for all forms of maintenance, repairs and modifications.
Includes inspection and diagnostic time as well as any delay or wait time
for manpower, bay space, parts, tooling, literature, repair support
equipment, decision making, etc. May be scheduled or unscheduled.
Repair Delay Hours: Time that machine is waiting for repairs due to
unavailability of labor, parts, facilities, equipment or tooling. Typically not
well documented in most machine downtime histories but is nonetheless
included, yet unrecognized, as part of the machine downtime record.
Generic Pareto Reference for Large Off Highway Trucks
The most successful mining support operations are those that have a clear
understanding of the problems and issues they are facing. The
identification and quantification of problems by component (e.g. engine,
transmission, …), system (e.g. hydraulics, electrical, …) or even process
(e.g. PM) facilitates an understanding of the influence each is having on
the final outcome enabling management to focus its attention and
resources on the most critical issues, i.e. those that will derive the
maximum benefit.
Unfortunately there are no Benchmarks that are applicable to this kind of

measurement. However a collection of guidelines for large Off Highway
Trucks in the 785 – 793 size class is available to evaluate actual site
performance in terms of MTBS, MTTR and impact on Availability. While not
actually benchmarks, the information contained in this reference defines
what we believe to be a reasonable level of acceptability for frequency
of downtime events (MTBS), duration of downtime events (MTTR) and
impact on Availability for each of the major areas on the machine.
The data is representative of a site operating at an Availability Index of

approximately 90% and is, of course, generic since actual results achieved
at any given mine are site-specific because results of this kind are a
function of not only application severity but also of the operating
environment, the maintenance the equipment receives and product
design shortcomings that may be peculiar to specific machines either by
model or within a given range of serial numbers.
The table on the following page provides a baseline that can be used as
a reference until individual site experience and history can be
documented. Using it to generate and perform a top problems
distribution analysis enables Project Management to identify and prioritize
critical issues affecting success of the project for investigation and
resolution.
It is important to note that due to the fact that most machine workorder
history databases to not do a very good job of documenting delays, the
duration of machine downtime events (MTTR) includes any delay
downtime associated with the particular event. As such, delays are not
listed separately in the table. A better way of doing business would be to
break out actual repair downtime from any delays associated with the
repair and, if it is found that delays are an issue, concentrate the

corrective efforts on the root cause of the problem.
"BASE MACHINE": Includes ladders,
Generic Pareto Reference hand rails, sheet metal, brackets and

other miscellaneous areas of the
machine not covered by one of the
Large OHT's (785-793) description
codes in the list.
ref. MTBS ref. MTTR ref. Availability CAB / OPERATOR STATION:
Component / System
(hours) (hours) Impact (%) This description code includes
cab, windshield, seat,
Accidents 6750 28.00 0.37% windows, etc.
Air System & Starting 2100 2.80 0.12% ELECTRONICS & ELECTRICAL:
Air Conditioning Auto 6650 0.30 0.00% Includes electrical / electronic
Lube System Base 6100 components & systems, e.g.
0.90 0.01%
lighting, VIMS, wiring harnesses,
Machine 4000 0.30 0.01%
connectors, etc.
Brakes & Brk System 1200 6.00 0.45%
ENGINE:
Cab / Operator Station 450 2.60 0.52%
Includes all engine and engine-
Chassis 2850 7.00 0.22% related components and systems
Cooling System 1300 5.10 0.35% not covered by another
Differential 6950 12.90 0.17% description code, e.g basic
Dispatch System 800 0.60 0.07% engine, air intake & exhaust, fuel
Dump Body 3750 6.90 0.16% system, etc.
Electronics & Electrical 1250 1.90 0.14% HYDRAULIC SYSTEM:
Engine 550 9.90 1.61% This description code includes all pumps,
hydraulic actuators, hoses, lines, oil coolers,
Filters Final 2800 1.30 0.04%
tanks, etc not included in another description
Drives Front 2100 12.20 0.52% code.
Wheels Hoist 6150 5.30 0.08%
System 1350 "MISCELLANEOUS": Includes any
3.10 0.21%
shutdown event that is not
Hydraulic System 1250 4.90 0.35% covered by one of the other
Mirrors 850 0.20 0.02% description codes.
miscellaneous PM 750 2.70 0.32%
Steering System 250 7.70 2.76% NOTE: MTTR = 16.80 hours for a 500
Suspension 1950 6.20 0.29% hour PM interval. In other words, if
MTBS for PM = 500 hours, MTTR =
Switches & Sensors 3150 9.40 0.27%
16.80 hours.
Tires & Rims 1950 1.90 0.09%
Torque Converter 550 3.20 0.52% "UNKNOWN":
Transmission 7250 5.10 0.06% Stoppage is unidentified or data is
unknown 900 5.30 0.53% unavailable. An excessive number of
5850 unknown events is an indication of
6.20 0.10%
inadequate recordskeeping
practices.
NOTE: If the PM interval is 500 hours, MTBSPM = 500
hours, MTTRPM = 16.80 hours and Impact of PM on
Availability = 3.00%.

Process Metrics Document

Uploaded by

Process Metrics Document

Uploaded by

TRACTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

METRICS (KPI’S) TO ASSESS

The primary goal and responsibility of the Maintenance Department is to

“Performance Metric” is a term used to describe the outcome of any

“Benchmark” is another term frequently used to describe performance.

Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of that effort has been

1. - Fleet Performance Metrics

2. - Maintenance & Repair Processes Metrics

2.1 - Preventive Maintenance

2.2 - Condition Monitoring

2.3 - Backlog Management

2.4 - Planning and Scheduling

2.5 - Parts Management

2.6 - Repair Management

2.7 - Component Management

2.8 - Human Resources - Training

2.9 - Continuous Improvement

1.1 Fleet Performance Metrics

1.1.1 - Mean Time Between Shutdowns (MTBS)

Shutdown count obtained from machine workorder history and dispatch

Benchmarks & Targets:

MTBS benchmarks vary significantly by machine model, their relative size,

MTBS Assessment / Characteristics

Table 1: Site performance through range of MTBS

Machine / Model MTBS

Table 2: MTBS guidelines for mining machines

1.1.2 - Mean Time To Repair (MTTR)

Total Downtime Hours

Benchmarks & Targets:

MTTR benchmarks vary somewhat by machine model, their relative size

1.1.3 - Percentage Scheduled Downtime

Scheduled Downtime Hours

Benchmarks & Targets:

1.1.4 - Contractual Availability

Contractual Total Hours * - MARC Downtime Hours

*NOTE: “Total Hours” are typically either based on calendar or scheduled

Benchmarks & Targets:

There is no Benchmark that is applicable to the Contractual Availability

provisions defined within the contract or, in the absence of a contract,

1.1.5 - Availability Index

Benchmarks & Targets:

1.1.6 - Maintenance Ratio

Maintenance & Repair Man-Hours

Benchmarks & Targets:

Table 3: Site performance through range of Maintenance Ratios

Table 4: Maintenance Ratio guidelines for mining machines

1.1.7 - Top Problems Summary

Downtime Hours (by system)

Downtime Hours (by system)

Cost (by system)

documenting costs but if Project Management is to have any opportunity

Benchmarks & Targets:

1.1.8 - Asset Utilization

Total calendar hours is equal to the total time in the period to be

Benchmarks & Targets:

1.1.9 - PIP / PSP Completion Rate

Benchmarks & Targets:

2.1 Preventive Maintenance

2.1.1 - MTBS after PM

T otal Operating Hours to First Stop (hours)

Unavailability due to Preventive Maintenance quantifies the impact of PM

Total PM Downtime Hours (hours)

2.1.4 - Service Accuracy

2.1.5 - Backlogs executed during PM

2.1.6 - Backlogs generated during PM

2.2 Condition Monitoring

2.2.1 - Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)

MTBF Operating Hours

The average operating time between equipment failures; the inverse of

2.2.2 - Unavailability Unscheduled

2.2.3 - Failure Reduction

Failure Reduction is a means of quantifying the impact of Condition

2.2.4 - Condition Monitoring Total Savings

CM Total Savings = CM Cost Saving – CM Program Cost (US$ )

Condition Monitoring Total Savings defines the “Value Proposition” for

2.2.5 - Total Backlogs Generated